The Strength of the Global Socio-Technical Pulp and Paper System and Its Consequences for Forestry Diversification

Philipp Jonas Kreutzer
philipp_jonas.kreutzer@ekh.lu.se

Department of Economic History, Lund University

Derek Garfield
derek.bradley.garfield@slu.se

Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

Cristián Alarcón Ferrari

Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

2025-10-09

Internationalization Changes Local Ecosystems

Global Sociotechnical Regimes

Global Sociotechnical Regimes

Figure 1: Yearly Pulp and Paper Production By Continent. Data from FAOSTAT (2024)

Global Sociotechnical Regimes

Figure 2: Sociotechnical Systems Connect Technology Production and Use to Fulfill Societal Functions, Reproduced from Geels (2004)

Global Sociotechnical Regimes

A global socio-technical regime can thus be defined as the dominant institutional rationality in a socio-technical system, which depicts a structural pattern between actors, institutions and technologies that has reached validity beyond specific territorial contexts, and which is diffused through internationalized networks (Fuenfschilling & Binz, 2018, p. 739)

Global Sociotechnical Regimes

These regimes differ in their strength: How similar are they across different geographical scales?

Schematic adapted from Miörner et al. (2022)

RQs

  1. How strong is the global regime for pulp and paper?

  2. Scale at which institutional rationalities develop?

  3. Key actors and their relationships?

  4. Conflicts and resolutions between global rationalities and local context?

  5. Channel of transformation: Actors, Networks, Technologies, Institutions?

System Boundaries of Pulp and Paper

Figure 3: System Boundaries

Data and Methods

Primary Data on Pulp and Paper Production

Narrative Literature Review

Research publications, books, and gray literature

Informs analysis of strength of global regime

Case Studies

Sweden Chile
Technology Exporter Technology Importer
Traditional Forestry Country New Forestry Actor
Boreal Forest Temperate Forests
🌲 Picea abies, Pinus Sylvestris 🌲 Pinus radiata, 🌳 Ecualyptus

Data Sources: Interviews, Case Studies, Financial and Strategy Documents

Informs sub-questions about global regime actors, effects and trends for countries

Results

Global North Appears Most Dominant in Developing Institutional Rationalities

  • High international integration of Nordic forests since 18th century (Lehtinen et al., 2016)

  • Nordic countries emerge as key technology producers in 20th century

Few Key Actors Active in International Networks But Rooted In Global North

Forestry

Pulp and Paper Mills

Key developments tied into global economic development, but even firm-level heterogenity in transitions

Global North exports technology, know-how, and rationality

Preliminary Key Takeaways

  1. Sociotechnical system of pulp and paper production strongly globalized

  2. Shared rationales about capital intensive, high-tech, automated and mechanized processes, developed in Global North and located with few actors

  3. But space for local experimentation down to firm-level

References

Beland Lindahl, K., & Westholm, E. (2011). Food, Paper, Wood, or Energy? Global Trends and Future Swedish Forest Use. Forests, 2(1), 51–65. https://doi.org/10.3390/f2010051
FAOSTAT. (2024). https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/FO/metadata.
Fuenfschilling, L., & Binz, C. (2018). Global socio-technical regimes. Research Policy, 47(4), 735–749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.02.003
Fuentealba, A., Duran, L., & Morales, N. S. (2021). The impact of forest science in Chile: History, contribution, and challenges. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 51(6), 753–765. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2020-0471
Geels, F. W. (2004). From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Research Policy, 33(6), 897–920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.015
Lehtinen, A. A., Donner-Amnell, J., & Sæther, B. (Eds.). (2016). Politics of forests: Northern forest-industrial regimes in the age of globalization. Routledge.
Manuschevich, D. (2016). Neoliberalization of forestry discourses in Chile. Forest Policy and Economics, 69, 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.03.006
Miörner, J., Heiberg, J., & Binz, C. (2022). How global regimes diffuse in space – Explaining a missed transition in San Diego’s water sector. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 44, 29–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2022.05.005
Ottosson, M., & Magnusson, T. (2013). Socio-technical regimes and heterogeneous capabilities: The Swedish pulp and paper industry’s response to energy policies. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 25(4), 355–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2013.774349
Soderholm, K., & Soderholm, P. (2020). Industrial energy transitions and the dynamics of innovation systems: The swedish pulp and paper industry, 1970-2010. ENVIRONMENTS, 7(70). https://doi.org/10.3390/environments7090070
Tahvanainen, V., Laakkonen, A., Pesala, O., Pittaluga, L., Hujala, T., & Pykalainen, J. (2024). Pulp addiction? Perspectives of local regime actors on the development of the growing pulp industry in Uruguay. FOREST POLICY AND ECONOMICS, 164(103248). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103248
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2024). Producer price index by commodity: Pulp, paper, and allied products: Wood pulp [WPU0911].